Representative bureaucracy and specialist knowledge in the European Commission
| Date | 01 June 2017 |
| Author | Johan Christensen,Joris van der Voet,Petra van den Bekerom |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12314 |
| Published date | 01 June 2017 |
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Representative bureaucracy and specialist
knowledge in the European Commission
Johan Christensen|Petra van den Bekerom|Joris van der Voet
Institute of Public Administration, Leiden
University, The Hague, The Netherlands
Correspondence
Johan Christensen, Institute of Public
Administration, Leiden University, PO Box
13228, The Hague, 2501 EE, The Netherlands.
Email: j.christensen@fgga.leidenuniv.nl
The article addresses an issue that has received little attention in
the literature on representative bureaucracy, namely the relation-
ship between representativeness and specialized expertise in pub-
lic administration. While representation may strengthen the
legitimacy of public bureaucracies, what implications does it have
for expert knowledge in these organizations? This issue is exam-
ined by looking at the recruitment of civil servants to the
European Commission, an international bureaucracy where the
question of geographical representation is of fundamental impor-
tance. Based on a quantitative analysis of nearly 200 recruitment
competitions for the organization from 1958 to 2015, the article
finds that competitions related to EU enlargement where national-
ity was an explicit criterion put significantly less emphasis on spe-
cialist qualifications and knowledge than other competitions. This
indicates a negative relationship between geographical representa-
tion and specialized expertise in recruitment to the European
Commission. Implications for broader debates about representa-
tive bureaucracy and international public administrations are
discussed.
1|INTRODUCTION
The Weberian model of bureaucracy has traditionally underpinned the structure and management of most public
administrations. A core element of the Weberian model is that officials possess specialized expertise, that is, techni-
cal knowledge acquired through formal training, which Weber saw as the principal reason for the superior efficiency
of bureaucracy as an organizational form (Weber 1947, pp. 337, 339). Yet, in recent decades, the Weberian concep-
tion of bureaucracy has been challenged, inter alia by ideas about representative bureaucracy. The representative
bureaucracy literature is concerned with the extent to which public organizations are representative of the society
that they serve (Groeneveld and Van de Walle 2010; Andrews and Ashworth 2015). It highlights how a representa-
tive composition of staff in public organizations may contribute to increased legitimacy and organizational perfor-
mance (Groeneveld et al. 2016). However, these arguments inevitably raise questions about the place of specialized
knowledge within a representative bureaucracy. Is representativeness beneficial or detrimental to expert knowledge
DOI 10.1111/padm.12314
450 © 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltdwileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/padmPublic Administration. 2017;95:450–467.
in public organizations? Surprisingly, this issue has received limited attention in the representative bureaucracy liter-
ature. The aim of this study is therefore to shed light on the relationship between representation and specialized
expertise in public administration.
An interesting site for exploring thisissue is international bureaucracies, the administrative bodies of inter-
national governmental organizations (Knill and Bauer 2016). Although there are few studies of international
organizations in the representative bureaucracy literature (see Gravier 2013), geographical representation is of
fundamental importance within international bureaucracies. To ensure fair representation of member states,
international organizations typically integrate staff from a large number of countries in their administrative
apparatus. Geographical representation may contribute to the legitimacy of these organizations by ensuring
equal access to administrative positions for citizens from all member states and by strengthening the identifica-
tion of national elites with the organization.It may also contribute to organizational performance by allowing
the organization to draw on the knowledge of officials about political, administrative and societal features at
the national level.
Arguments about bureaucratic representation are particularly relevant to the European Union (EU), given the
strong role of the executive bureaucracy in the organization. The executive body of the EU –the European Com-
mission –enjoys considerable political power, including a near-monopoly on proposing legislation. Critics argue that
the power of the executive and the weakness of parliamentary control has given rise to a lack of democratic legiti-
macy in the EU (see Follesdal and Hix 2006 for a review). In this kind of political system, bureaucratic representation
may constitute an important supplement to political representation in terms of legitimacy (see Groeneveld
et al. 2016). A couple of recent studies have indeed pointed to a clear rationale of bureaucratic representation in
the European Commission’s policies for recruiting officials from new EU member states (Gravier 2008, 2013). Yet,
we know little about what influence representativeness has had on other aspects of the European Commission
bureaucracy, including the role of knowledge in the administration. How has the recurring need to integrate citizens
from new member states affected the emphasis on specialized expertise in the Commission?
This article addresses this issue by looking at the relationship between geographical representation and special-
ist knowledge criteria in centralized recruitment competitions to the European Commission. In the European Com-
mission, most permanent officials are recruited through large-scale, publicly advertised competitions organized
periodically in a variety of fields, in which candidates are assessed based on educational qualifications and/or tests
of different types of knowledge and skills (see Christensen 2015). The article examines the relationship between
geographical representativeness and specialized expertise by systematically comparing the emphasis on specialist
qualifications and knowledge in two types of recruitment competitions: (1) competitions where nationality was an
explicit criterion –that is, the ‘special enlargement competitions’organized to recruit citizens from new member
states –and (2) competitions that did not take nationality into account.
The main objective of this analysis is to contribute to the representative bureaucracy literature by empirically
assessing the relationship between representation and specialized knowledge in a public administration. The second
aim is to add to existing work on representative bureaucracy in international organizations, in particular regarding
the impact of geographical representation. The final objective is to contribute to the public administration literature
about the EU by examining how a growing need for representation in the European Commission has affected its
recruitment policies.
The study examines the following research question: What is the relationship between geographical representa-
tion and specialist qualifications in the centralized recruitment competitions of the European Commission between
1958 and 2015? The analysis is based on a new dataset of nearly 200 recruitment competitions for the European
Commission over a period of more than 50 years. The analysis shows that special enlargement competitions where
nationality was an explicit criterion were significantly less likely to take educational qualifications into account and
put significantly less emphasis on specialist knowledge in recruitment tests. Moreover, it shows that these effects
were partly mediated by the administrative grade for which new entrants were sought and the defined field of
recruitment.
CHRISTENSEN ET AL.451
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations